Wall Street Journal vs. Motor Trend

Wall-Street-Journal-vs-Motor-TrendFine wine or MD 20/20? You spend your money and take your choice.

I enjoy reading a variety of publications to observe writing styles, and there’s good and bad writing. I was delighted to see reviews of the new Nissan Versa Note in both Motor Trend (MT) and the Wall Street Journal (WSJ). One was sublime, and the other was – well – ridiculous:

“Versa-tile: The Note’s aero-friendly exterior may not boost its speed, but provides a comfortable and airy interior” (MT).

“And no, the Nissan Versa Note isn’t a great inexpensive car. Actually, it is a shambles, a car so out of step with the best in its segment, it almost has an early 1970s East German vibe to it” (WSJ).

I am sure that the WSJ’s Dan Neil makes quite a bit more money per word than the MT writer. You do get what you pay for – at least in this instance.

Reading the WSJ review was so fun that I laughed out loud at least three times. Well done, Mr. Neil. In contrast, I winced several times while reading the MT review.

My friends, take care in what you do today. If possible, bring others delight rather than pain.

1. I like the appearance of the Nissan Versa Note, but Mr. Neil’s review made it clear that I will never own one, no matter how inexpensive it may be.

2. The bad grammar reflected by the wrong use of a comma in the MT quote did occur in that article.
3. I left out the name of the MT writer, as an act of mercy.